United States v. Clapp’s Empirical Analysis
46 F.3d 795 · 1995
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably No. 98-5283 (2000), United States v. Ervasti (2000)
33 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Franks v. Delaware · Lehman Bros. v. Lilly · Arizona v. Manypenny · National Labor Relations Board v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Court observed that reckless disregard for the truth requires a showing that the defendant "in fact entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his publication.” This subjective test may be met not only by showing actual deliberation but also by demonstrating that there existed "obvious reasons to doubt the veracity of the informant or the accuracy of his reports.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the test for determining whether an affiant's statements were made with reckless disregard for the truth is not simply whether the affiant acknowledged that what he [or she] reported was true, but whether, viewing all of the evidence, the affiant must have entertained serious doubts as to the truth of his [or her] statements or had obvious reasons to doubt the accuracy of the information he [or she] reported.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“accurately and adequately state the applicable law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.